Report of Royal Commission upon the Administration and Operation of the Contagious Diseases Acts.
- Great Britain. Royal Commission on the Contagious Diseases Acts
- Date:
- 1871
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Report of Royal Commission upon the Administration and Operation of the Contagious Diseases Acts. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service. The original may be consulted at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service.
830/952 page 732
![FOKTY- 20,042. I cannot describe the exact penalty, but IIFTII IJAY. the principle has been in action. I do not say with -■ regard to the whole army, but can you suggest any Jkfr. J. S. Mill, other description ?—I have not considered that part of the subiect, but certainly I am not prepared to suggest any other. 20.043. And I understand you to be of opinion that in no case should the State resort to such a remedy as is found iu these Acts ?—Exactly. I do not think that the State should resort to any remedy which operates by taking means beforehand to make the indulgence safe. 20.044. I think you told us that you have only a general knowledge of those Acts, and no practical experience of their working.-*—That is so. 20.045. You spoke of the violation of personal liberty, and I think you also, if I took down your words correctly, objected to the power of apprehend- ing women on suspicion. Do you think, as far as you know the Act, that the expression apprehend the woman on suspicion is an expression taken in its ordinary sense, which is applicable to the powers which these Acts give ?—It seems to me that it is applicable, as far as I understand the subject; inasmuch as Avhen woiiiGii nil ve not voluntarily de- clared themselves to be prostitutes, they may be, as I understand, watched by policemen, and if the police- man thinks a woman is practising prostitution, although not registered, he has it in his power, on any grounds of suspicion which appear to him to be adequate, to require the woman to enter into an undertaking to submit herself to examination, or to take her before a magistrate, who will make her do so, 20.046. I am glad I asked you the question, because it is very clear you are under a misapprehension. There is no such power calling on a woman to make a declaration compelling her to be examined. The onlj- power of the police in this case is where they have good reason to suppose a woman to be practising common prostitution, if she does not voluntarily sign a paper stating she is willing to be examined, to lay an information before a magistrate, and proceed in the ordinary course before that magistrate. You would haidly call that apprehension on suspicion, would you ?—Certainly, I should call that apprehend- ing a woman on' suspicion. It is apprehending a woman on grounds which, in the opinion of the police- man, place her under suspicion of practising prostitu- tion without acknowledgment. I am aware that ])olicemeu have no power of using any compulsion for making a woman enter into an engagement subjecting herself to examination. I am aware that that can only be done before a magistrate, and after such inquiries as he might hold; but the policeman has it in his power, whether he uses the power or not, to use threats to induce the Avoman to enter into this engagement. 20.047. I have no wish to raise any question on the narrow meaning of the word apprehend, but as you have said it is a violation of personal liberty, I Avill ask you whether you are aware that the liberty of such women, as of all other persons, is protected by law, until interrupted under the authority of law ? —Yes, I did not make that distinction as I ought to have done. I admit its i-elevancy. 20.048. When you said that a prostitute ought to have the power of defending herself before the ordi- nary tribunals, I think you would admit that she has that power, because she is brought before the magis- trate and that magistrate is not only free but bound in duty to hear everything that a woman has got to say, and judge of the evidence before deciding her case as he would iu any other ?—That depends on whether it is explained to her that she may be defended by counsel. 20.049. The attack on personal liberty is subject to those usual grounds of protection which the law gives to all parties ?—It may be so. 20.050. In the case, which is not only a possible case but I fear from the evidence we have had the not very uncommon one of disease being communicated to innocent Avives and innocent children, would you really trust to the power of divorce as the only remedy in such a case, should you not endeavour at least to resort to prevention as being better than trusting to so uncertain a cure ?—I think that if pre- vention is to be applied at all, it should be apphed to the man, who alone has the power of committing this offence in a direct way. When a woman infects any- one the man must always be a consenting party to running the risk : it is only a man who having been infected himself can communicate infection to an inno- cent person, and therefore if there is any argument for prevention it should be for preventive measures applied to men who infect these women, and not to the women themselves. 20.051. Do you know or have you ever thought of any process by which prevention could be applied to men ?—1 think that it could. No doubt it would fail very often ; but inasmuch as it certainly does happen frequently that women are brought under the operation of these Acts through being watched by the police, and its being ascertained that they frequent certain houses aloug with men, the police can equally ascertain who the men are who go there with them; and when they find that men have been seen to frequent along with prostitutes houses of this description, those men might be compelled to undergo examination for a certain pei'iod afterwards. 20.052. Am I to understand you seriously to pro- pose that in this country we should adopt a system of espionage over every man seen going into a brothel, and that men seen to go into a brothel should be subject all alike to personal examination ?—I am not suggesting espionage; but if it is already in practice on women who go to brothels, with a view of ascertaining whether a woman is a prostitute by her being seen there, I think the woman should not be singled out to be subject to examination, but the men should be subjected to it also, or even if the women were not subjected the men might be, but if the one is, certainly I should say both. 20.053. Therefore you do, as I understand, recom- mend such a system of espionage as I have described ? —I do not recommend it, because I do not recommend the Acts at all ; I do not recommend that there be any espionage practised upon women, and thei-efore not on men either. 20.054. Do not you recommend it to this extent, if any remedy is attempted for the evils complained of, it should be done in that shape ?—If any preventive mea- sures are to be taken I should say it should be in that shape. But penal measures, or remedial measures by means of hospitals, could be adopted independently of that: increasing the hospitals, and increasing the facilities for admission of those who are diseased, and laying severe penalties on the man who communicates this disease to an innocent woman. 20.055. If the Legislature did enact with a view to jjreventing such cases as this, that the woman affected should have the remedy of divorce, would your know- ledge of human nature lead you to the conclusion that that remedy would be lesorted to in one case in a hundred, or one case in a thousand ?—A good many more than that, though probably not the majority. 20.056. (C/iaij-man.) Are you aware that for a man to give his wife a disease of that description would be adjudged cruelty by the Court of Divorce, and would be a grouud for a divorce, at all events d mensa ?— Yes, but not complete dissolution of the matrimonial tie. 20.057. {Sir J. Pahington.) Would you make it so ?—Yes. 20.058. {Chairman.) You would make it a vin- culo ?—Yes, a vinculo, accompanied with heavy pecu- niary damages for the benefit of the sufferers, the wife or children. 20.059. {Sir J. Pakington.') We have received very strong evidence before this Commission, that at one, at least, I think more, but at one of the most populous places to which these Acts apply, one result has been that whereas there were previously hundreds of children—when I say children, girls under 13, 14, and](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21365945_0830.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
